University of Groningen The dialectic of ambiguity Laar, Jan Albert van IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2003 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Laar, J. A. V. (2003). The dialectic of ambiguity: a contribution to the study of argumentation. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 29-09-2021 THE DIALECTIC OF AMBIGUITY ACONTRIBUTION TO THE STUDY OF ARGUMENTATION RIJKSUNIVERSITEIT GRONINGEN THE DIALECTIC OF AMBIGUITY ACONTRIBUTION TO THE STUDY OF ARGUMENTATION Proefschrift ter verkrijging van het doctoraat in de Wijsbegeerte aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, dr. F. Zwarts, in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 19 juni 2003 om 14.15 uur door Jan Albert van Laar geboren op 9 oktober 1967 te Ede promotores: Prof. dr. E.C.W. Krabbe Prof. dr. F.H. van Eemeren beoordelingscommissie: Prof. dr. M.V.B.P.M. van Hees Prof. dr. F. Veltman Prof. dr. D.N. Walton Voor Sanne en Oscar ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation was written while fulfilling a position as a trainee research assistent (AIO) at the Department of Theoretical Philosophy of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Groningen. The position was made possible by a grant ("parelsubsidie") that the University of Groningen awarded to the Department of Theoretical Philosophy for being an outstanding research group. This study is the result of many conversations and discussions with others. First of all I wish to thank my supervisors, Erik Krabbe and Frans van Eemeren, for their thorough supervision, for making every meeting enjoyable, for the freedom that they offered me, and for putting their trust in me. I thank Martin van Hees, Frank Veltman and Douglas Walton for participating in the reading committee and for their useful comments. I also would like to thank the members of the various discussion groups that I have participated in – the members of the Promotion Club Cognitive Patterns of the Department of Theoretical Philosophy; the participants of the Research Colloquia from the Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric of the University of Amsterdam, and Peter Houtlosser in particular; the members of the promoteam, Henrike Jansen and Janne Maaike Gerlofs especially; the members of the "Hippe Filosofen"; the members of the "Disco" group; and the members of Grolog. I would also like to thank Tamar Sarnoff and the Language Centre of the University of Groningen in the person of Julia Harvey for helping me with my English. 6 May 2003 Jan Albert van Laar TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: THE DIALECTICAL APPROACH TO ARGUMENT AND ARGUMENT CRITICISM ............................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................1 1. THE METHODOLOGICAL ASSUMPTION OF THE DIALECTICAL APPROACH............................................1 2. A LEXICAL-CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF ‘DISCUSSION’ ......................................................................3 3. DIALECTICAL MODELS AS EXPLICATA...............................................................................................6 4. AN OUTLINE OF THE VARIOUS FEATURES OF RESOLUTION-ORIENTED MODELS..................................7 Initial situation ................................................................................................................................7 Main goal versus participant’s aim.................................................................................................7 Rules................................................................................................................................................8 Two notions of validity ....................................................................................................................9 5. TWO MODELS FOR DISCUSSION........................................................................................................12 Complex Persuasion Dialogue......................................................................................................13 Critical Discussion........................................................................................................................14 6. FALLACIES FROM A DIALECTICAL PERSPECTIVE..............................................................................15 Hamblin.........................................................................................................................................15 Barth, Martens and Krabbe...........................................................................................................15 Walton and Krabbe .......................................................................................................................16 Pragma-dialectics .........................................................................................................................17 7. DISCUSSING FALLACIES ..................................................................................................................18 Modelling an immanent dialectical approach to fallacies ............................................................20 8. THE ISSUES OF ACTIVE AMBIGUITY: THREE RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................22 CHAPTER 2: THE CONCEPT OF ACTIVE AMBIGUITY...........................................................25 1. THE DEFINITION OF ACTIVE AMBIGUITY ............................................................................................25 The definiendum ............................................................................................................................25 The definition.................................................................................................................................27 The linguistic clause......................................................................................................................28 The relevance clause .....................................................................................................................30 Unspecified expressions ................................................................................................................30 2. WALTON’S CLASSIFICATION ...........................................................................................................31 3. HAMBLIN’S PROGRAM OF A THEORY OF CHARGES...........................................................................33 CHAPTER 3: THE LINGUISTIC ASPECT......................................................................................35 1. FEATURES OF NATURAL LANGUAGES: SEMANTIC AMBIGUITY.........................................................35 1.1. UNCLEAR AND AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE ACCORDING TO PRAGMA-DIALECTICS ............................35 1.2. DE GROOT AND MEDENDORP ON ELLIPSIS ...................................................................................36 Vague terms and colligenda ..........................................................................................................36 Ambiguous terms and complenda..................................................................................................37 1.3. NAESS ON THE WAYS MEANING MAY DIVERGE.............................................................................37 Normative ambiguity .....................................................................................................................39 Descriptive ambiguity....................................................................................................................40 Truth conditional ambiguity..........................................................................................................41 Argumentational ambiguity...........................................................................................................42 Occurrence synonymity and ambiguity .........................................................................................43 Naess’s concepts of semantic ambiguity .......................................................................................44 1.4. THE SUPERVALUATIONAL THEORY OF LANGUAGE .......................................................................45 Vagueness......................................................................................................................................45